MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410967142 · doi:10.59324/ejiss.2025.1(3).19

A Review of Financial Strategy Tools for Sustainable Electric Vehicle (EV) Component Manufacturing in North America

2025· review· en· W4410967142 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tonimi Rotimi-Ojo, Adebayo James

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Innovative Studies and Sustainability · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComponent (thermodynamics)Electric vehicleBusinessAutomotive engineeringManufacturing engineeringFinanceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electrification of transportation is reshaping industrial and environmental priorities across North America, placing electric vehicle (EV) component manufacturing at the forefront of green economic transformation. This review explores the financial strategy tools used to support sustainable EV component manufacturing in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. It evaluates traditional and emerging financial modeling techniques—such as net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), real options, lifecycle cost analysis (LCCA), and scenario analysis—and their application in managing investment risk, optimizing costs, and aligning with sustainability targets. The paper further examines public-private financing frameworks, including the Inflation Reduction Act, Canada's Net Zero Accelerator, and green bond instruments, and compares these with global practices in China, the European Union, and Japan. It identifies key cost optimization strategies, such as circular economy integration, modular design, and vertical integration, while highlighting how geopolitical and technological uncertainties have intensified the need for adaptive, data-driven financial planning. Through this synthesis, the review reveals major gaps in financial modeling standardization, ESG integration, labor-capital alignment, and digital data infrastructure. It concludes by outlining future research directions in AI-enhanced forecasting, regional data harmonization, and sustainability-linked investment design. Ultimately, this review provides a framework for stakeholders to leverage financial innovation in driving competitive, climate-aligned, and resilient EV component manufacturing in North America.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Innovative Studies and SustainabilitySame topicSustainable Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207